Supreme Court Grants Bail To Three PFI Workers In RSS Leader Sreenivasan’s Murder Case
Supreme Court held that the accused can't be blamed for the delay in trial, even though the trial had been stayed by the Court in their Petitions.
The Supreme Court today granted bail to three accused PFI workers in the conspiracy case related to the murder of RSS worker Sreenivasan in Palakkad on the ground that the completion of the trial would take a long time and that the delay in the trial cannot be attributed to the accused. The trial in the case had been stayed by the Apex Court on petitions filed by the same accused.
A Bench of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan granted bail to three of the accused and adjourned the case of the others. The Court was considering SLPs filed by the accused against an order of the Kerala High Court.
Senior Advocates Aditya Sondhi and Raghenth Basant appeared for the petitioners, while Additional Solicitor General Raja Thakare appeared for the National Investigation Agency (NIA).
The ASG, at the outset, submitted that he is strongly opposing the bail plea of two out of three of the accused.
The Court was told that the trial did not progress because the same had been stayed by the Apex Court in petitions filed by the accused. The petitioners informed the Court that they have filed applications for withdrawing the petitions in which the Court stayed the trial.
The ASG argued that the accused, at whose instance the trial was stayed, cannot seek bail on the ground that the completion of the trial will take a long time.
The Bench noted that the trial had not progressed since May 6, 2024, when the Supreme Court had stayed it. Justice Oka remarked, “On a petition filed by these appellants, this Court granted stay. Therefore, this fact cannot be held against the appellants.”
When the Additional Solicitor General submitted that the trial had not moved forward because of the stay, Justice Bhuyan stated, “But stay has been granted by this court on satisfaction.”
The ASG was asked how many witnesses would be examined by the prosecution. He responded by saying, “Approximately 400, my Lord… these are the cases which are based on circumstantial evidence… and therefore, witnesses are bound to be a large number. Merely because in a case there are a large number of witnesses, that cannot be a ground....”.
The ASG submitted that when there is a systemic delay for which the prosecution cannot be faulted, the nature and gravity of the offence should be taken into account.
"This is not a case merely of murder of Sreenivasan. It is a case where they are propagating their India 2047 agenda", the ASG submitted.
On being asked about the allegations against the accused Saddam Hussain, the ASG submitted, “He is the Imam of that mosque where the training is imparted to the members…. Secondly, he has attended the conspiracy meeting on 15th April, on 16th April also. Thirdly, he has harboured the main assailant.” He added that the mobile phone of one of the accused was kept hidden in the Mosque by the said accused.
The Bench then asked, “Is there an allegation that they actually participated in the assault?”
To which the ASG replied, “One person was killed. Their motto was, my Lord, any available Hindu to be eliminated within 24 hours…”
As to co-accused Ashraf Moulavi, the NIA stated, “He is the national in-charge of PFI and he has propagated the ISIS ideology. He has delivered hate speeches.”
The Court responded, “What are the hate speeches delivered by him? We have to see what are those hate speeches.”
Regarding antecedents, the Bench recorded in its order, “The only antecedents against first and second appellants are under Section 151 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973. There is no antecedent reported against the third appellant.”
"On a petition filed by these appellants, this Court granted a stay. Therefore, this fact cannot be held against the appellants", the Court said in its order, rejecting the argument that the accused cannot cite delay in trial to get bail.
The Court further noted in its order, “There are more than 1,000 prosecution witnesses cited, out of which approximately 400 will be examined, as NIA by the learned ASG.”
Considering the nature of allegations and the delay in the trial, the Court granted bail and held, “Considering the nature of allegations against the appellants and considering the fact that trial is not likely to commence in near future, appellants are entitled to be enlarged on bail on appropriate stringent terms and conditions.”
The Court directed, “For that purpose, the appellants shall be produced before the special court within a period of one week from today. Special Court shall enlarge the appellants on appropriate stringent terms and conditions. The Counsel for the respondent shall be heard before fixing terms and conditions.”
Three out of the six petitioners were granted bail. The matter concerning the others was adjourned and is to be listed for hearing the day after tomorrow, i.e. May 21, 2025.
Background
On November 29, 2024, the Supreme Court had observed that the Kerala High Court erred in granting bail to 17 accused in the PFI conspiracy case through a common judgment without analysing individual roles, including that of those accused in the murder of RSS worker Srinivasan in Palakkad in April 2022. The Court had also expressed concern about the Registry’s failure to list SLPs despite multiple directions.
The accused are being prosecuted under several provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), Indian Penal Code (IPC), and the Religious Institutions (Prevention of Misuse) Act, 1988.
Cause Title: Saddam Hussain MK v. Union of India & Connected matters [SLP(Crl) No. 9623/2024; Diary No. 30988/2024]
